Fox News calls Black Lives Matter movement a "murder movement," "hate group"

Fox News ran an onscreen banner during Monday night's episode of "Fox & Friends" referring to the Black Lives Matter movement as a "murder movement," and one Fox host wondered why the movement wasn't labeled a hate group.

"Fox & Friends" co-host Brian Kilmeade was speaking with Milwaukee County Sheriff David Clarke about the death of Deputy Darren Goforth of Harris County, Texas, who was fatally shot while pumping gas in a Houston suburb on Friday night. Goforth was white, and the man who police believe killed him, Shannon Miles, is black.

There is no evidence that Miles has any connection to the Black Lives Matter movement, but the "Fox & Friends" segment made a point to strongly imply that Black Lives Matter was at fault for Goforth’s death.

An onscreen banner during the segment read "Murder Movement" above a subhead that said, "Sheriff: #BlackLivesMatter Is Out Of Control." Clarke told Kilmeade on the show that he's "sick and tired" of seeing headlines emphasizing the race of white officers shooting unarmed black people. The headline he’d like to see is "Black Man Shoots White Defenseless Police Officer," Clarke said.

“President Obama has breathed life into an ugly movement … we now have to counter this slime. This filth coming out of these cop-haters,” Clarke said as Fox showed footage of Black Lives Matter protesters.

Clarke, a frequent guest on Fox News, is regularly critical of Black Lives Matter. He's bashed the movement for not protesting black-on-black crime, and told Fox News host Megyn Kelly that he would have been embarrassed of Sandra Bland if she had been his daughter.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/black-lives-matter-fox-news-hate-group_55e5c102e4b0b7a9633a3b12

Fun fact -- a report last year found that of 26 on-air Fox News personalities, 24 were white. If Fox News looked like America, there would be 16 whites and the rest would be minorities.

It's a bit confusing because the chap at the start of the video did refer to "black lives matter", but he's not David Clarke, even though that name was underneath at the time.

David Clarke didn't refer to "black lives matter" but he did talk a lot about cop haters and "the ghetto".

Anyway, I agree with the first chap. Saying that black lives matter implies that other lives don't matter.

Fox "News" is the hate group. They are a sewer of lies.

It was Kevin Jackson who was talking about "black lives matter". He said it was being financed by leftists who have no concern about black lives.

Raggamuffin wrote:It's a bit confusing because the chap at the start of the video did refer to "black lives matter", but he's not David Clarke, even though that name was underneath at the time.

David Clarke didn't refer to "black lives matter" but he did talk a lot about cop haters and "the ghetto".

Anyway, I agree with the first chap. Saying that black lives matter implies that other lives don't matter.

No it doesn't, it implies that black lives matter, too. It's a response to a bunch of black people being unjustly murdered by police and others without being brought to justice: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/black-lives-matter-11-racist-police-killings-with-no-justice-served-20141204

Huffington Post wrote:Fox News ran an onscreen banner during Monday night's episode of "Fox & Friends" referring to the Black Lives Matter movement as a "murder movement," and one Fox host wondered why the movement wasn't labeled a hate group.

What do they call the police? The North Side gang?

Raggamuffin wrote:Anyway, I agree with the first chap. Saying that black lives matter implies that other lives don't matter.

Not really.  It's a simple answer to the assertion by police, that black lives don't matter.  Black lives do matter is the obverse of the issue that has been framed by police in America.

"Other lives" is the converse of the issue.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:It's a bit confusing because the chap at the start of the video did refer to "black lives matter", but he's not David Clarke, even though that name was underneath at the time.

David Clarke didn't refer to "black lives matter" but he did talk a lot about cop haters and "the ghetto".

Anyway, I agree with the first chap. Saying that black lives matter implies that other lives don't matter.

No it doesn't, it implies that black lives matter, too. It's a response to a bunch of black people being unjustly murdered by police and others without being brought to justice: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/black-lives-matter-11-racist-police-killings-with-no-justice-served-20141204

Ask yourself if many of these black people care if a white person is killed, or if a police officer is killed - especially a white one. A lot of them do not - they only care if black people are killed. I don't think you even care much when white people are killed tbh.

It's all wrong - they should say that all lives matter, and concentrate on the issue of trigger-happy police officers. Then again, I think some police officers are trigger-happy because they feel under threat from gun-toting criminals - of any colour.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

No it doesn't, it implies that black lives matter, too. It's a response to a bunch of black people being unjustly murdered by police and others without being brought to justice: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/black-lives-matter-11-racist-police-killings-with-no-justice-served-20141204

Ask yourself if many of these black people care if a white person is killed, or if a police officer is killed - especially a white one. A lot of them do not - they only care if black people are killed. I don't think you even care much when white people are killed tbh.
Hyperbole and hearsay

It's all wrong - they should say that all lives matter, and concentrate on the issue of trigger-happy police officers. Then again, I think some police officers are trigger-happy because they feel under threat from gun-toting criminals - of any colour.

You still fail to see why this arose do you not?
There has been a culmination of black people being killed unjustly, in what already is in parts of the US, racist.
Do whites suffer such discrimination or sterotypes by the Police?
Not even close

Not just hearsay - from the mouths of black people on forums actually. They may not be representative but they are very hostile to white people, and they really don't care much if white people are killed. They just talk about "white tears".

Why should white people care if black people don't?

Raggamuffin wrote:Not just hearsay - from the mouths of black people on forums actually. They may not be representative but they are very hostile to white people, and they really don't care much if white people are killed. They just talk about "white tears".

Why should white people care if black people don't?

That is heasay based off a very small number of black people where you are forming a poor view from.
Yes some black people are hostile to white people, all wrong butyou have never walked in their shoes have you? So just going off a small amountof angry black people is not a very good representative and hence hyperbole. I think everyone should care where you are still missing the point. There is still vast discrmination in the US and notustto blacks either, but they suffer the most. Like I said they more than any are sterotyped and discrminated against the most and this is backed up by countless stats and information. You are making this a further problem it does not need to be, based off how you have feel in regards to some peoples views. Thus not looking at the bigger picture. White people do not suffer this sort of discrimination on the scale where blacks do and where it has been something that has gone on for centuries.
Like I say, try walking in their shoes.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:Not just hearsay - from the mouths of black people on forums actually. They may not be representative but they are very hostile to white people, and they really don't care much if white people are killed. They just talk about "white tears".

Why should white people care if black people don't?

That is heasay based off a very small number of black people where you are forming a poor view from.
Yes some black people are hostile to white people, all wrong butyou have never walked in their shoes have you? So just going off a small amountof angry black people is not a very good representative and hence hyperbole. I think everyone should care where you are still missing the point. There is still vast discrmination in the US and notustto blacks either, but they suffer the most. Like I said they more than any are sterotyped and discrminated against the most and this is backed up by countless stats and information. You are making this a further problem it does not need to be, based off how you have feel in regards to some peoples views. Thus not looking at the bigger picture. White people do not suffer this sort of discrimination where blacks have and where it has been something that has gone on for centuries.
Like I say, try walking in their shoes.

Well how do I know what black people think if I can't go on what some of them say? We can't do a poll of every single black person in the world can we? Some people on here will extrapolate from what a few white people say, so I can do that as well.

I don't like people being grouped in this manner, or grouping themselves in this manner. If they're concerned only about other black people, then non-black people will say - well why should I care about you if you only care about other black people?

You call it discrimination, but that's hearsay ...

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


That is heasay based off a very small number of black people where you are forming a poor view from.
Yes some black people are hostile to white people, all wrong butyou have never walked in their shoes have you? So just going off a small amountof angry black people is not a very good representative and hence hyperbole. I think everyone should care where you are still missing the point. There is still vast discrmination in the US and notustto blacks either, but they suffer the most. Like I said they more than any are sterotyped and discrminated against the most and this is backed up by countless stats and information. You are making this a further problem it does not need to be, based off how you have feel in regards to some peoples views. Thus not looking at the bigger picture. White people do not suffer this sort of discrimination where blacks have and where it has been something that has gone on for centuries.
Like I say, try walking in their shoes.

Well how do I know what black people think if I can't go on what some of them say? We can't do a poll of every single black person in the world can we? Some people on here will extrapolate from what a few white people say, so I can do that as well.

I don't like people being grouped in this manner, or grouping themselves in this manner. If they're concerned only about other black people, then non-black people will say - well why should I care about you if you only care about other black people?

You call it discrimination, but that's hearsay ...

1) Thatis absurd to say you know how they think when you have never experinced being a black person where again you go off a select group of people you have communicated with. Then again I have to take your view of the people you have met which is miles removed from the black people I have corresponded with.

2) I doubt many really care what you think here as you are not an advcate to help the problem and thus itwill be people that want to bring about a change to an ongoing problem. All of which you still fail to recognise.

Sorry you now claim the discrimination is hearsay?
Move along I am not going to waste my time with such idiocy.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:It's a bit confusing because the chap at the start of the video did refer to "black lives matter", but he's not David Clarke, even though that name was underneath at the time.

David Clarke didn't refer to "black lives matter" but he did talk a lot about cop haters and "the ghetto".

Anyway, I agree with the first chap. Saying that black lives matter implies that other lives don't matter.

No it doesn't, it implies that black lives matter, too. It's a response to a bunch of black people being unjustly murdered by police and others without being brought to justice: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/black-lives-matter-11-racist-police-killings-with-no-justice-served-20141204

Ask yourself if many of these black people care if a white person is killed, or if a police officer is killed - especially a white one. A lot of them do not - they only care if black people are killed. I don't think you even care much when white people are killed tbh.

It's all wrong - they should say that all lives matter, and concentrate on the issue of trigger-happy police officers. Then again, I think some police officers are trigger-happy because they feel under threat from gun-toting criminals - of any colour.

Trigger-happy police are killing black people at a disproportionate rate -- AND not being brought to justice. This problem is about racism.

Do you show the same level of concern with Syrian victims of ISIS violence as you do to, say, Lee Rigby? You're right in that all lives matter, but it's only natural to be more concerned about murders in your own community.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

No it doesn't, it implies that black lives matter, too. It's a response to a bunch of black people being unjustly murdered by police and others without being brought to justice: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/black-lives-matter-11-racist-police-killings-with-no-justice-served-20141204

Ask yourself if many of these black people care if a white person is killed, or if a police officer is killed - especially a white one. A lot of them do not - they only care if black people are killed. I don't think you even care much when white people are killed tbh.

It's all wrong - they should say that all lives matter, and concentrate on the issue of trigger-happy police officers. Then again, I think some police officers are trigger-happy because they feel under threat from gun-toting criminals - of any colour.

One issue at a a time.  AS Bertolt Brecht said in Three-Penny Opera: "First you feed the face, then talk right and wrong,"  

Right now, American police are indiscriminately killing black men.  Not women.  Not whites.  Not even black women, in the numbers that they kill black men.  Look at it this way: there are bigger fish to fry right now.  We'll get to those other injustices later.

Raggamuffin wrote:Not just hearsay - from the mouths of black people on forums actually. They may not be representative but they are very hostile to white people, and they really don't care much if white people are killed. They just talk about "white tears".

Why should white people care if black people don't?

No! It's not hearsay. It's not even voices. It's from the cameras. The cameras are showing the public what has been happening for decades. The people are appalled.

Black Lives Matter protests:











What Fox News is doing here is flat wrong.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well how do I know what black people think if I can't go on what some of them say? We can't do a poll of every single black person in the world can we? Some people on here will extrapolate from what a few white people say, so I can do that as well.

I don't like people being grouped in this manner, or grouping themselves in this manner. If they're concerned only about other black people, then non-black people will say - well why should I care about you if you only care about other black people?

You call it discrimination, but that's hearsay ...

1) Thatis absurd to say you know how they think when you have never experinced being a black person where again you go off a select group of people you have communicated with. Then again I have to take your view of the people you have met which is miles removed from the black people I have corresponded with.

2) I doubt many really care what you think here as you are not an advcate to help the problem and thus itwill be people that want to bring about a change to an ongoing problem. All of which you still fail to recognise.

Sorry you now claim the discrimination is hearsay?
Move along I am not going to waste my time with such idiocy.

I know what some of them think because of what they say.

I don't really care if nobody cares what I think. You have no more importance than me here, so perhaps nobody cares what you think either. It's a forum, it's not a law-making organisation.

I'll move along when I feel like it. You don't get to decide what I say and when or where I say it.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ask yourself if many of these black people care if a white person is killed, or if a police officer is killed - especially a white one. A lot of them do not - they only care if black people are killed. I don't think you even care much when white people are killed tbh.

It's all wrong - they should say that all lives matter, and concentrate on the issue of trigger-happy police officers. Then again, I think some police officers are trigger-happy because they feel under threat from gun-toting criminals - of any colour.

Trigger-happy police are killing black people at a disproportionate rate -- AND not being brought to justice. This problem is about racism.

Do you show the same level of concern with Syrian victims of ISIS violence as you do to, say, Lee Rigby? You're right in that all lives matter, but it's only natural to be more concerned about murders in your own community.

I've told you before - maybe black people run away more, or maybe they resist arrest more. Give me some facts, not just your opinion.

I'm not going around on the streets with banners saying "white lives matter", or "soldiers' lives matter". If you're going to make a public display of something, you're going to get comments which might be negative ones. Fox News is entitled to their opinion - you don't have to watch it if you don't like it.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


1) Thatis absurd to say you know how they think when you have never experinced being a black person where again you go off a select group of people you have communicated with. Then again I have to take your view of the people you have met which is miles removed from the black people I have corresponded with.

2) I doubt many really care what you think here as you are not an advcate to help the problem and thus itwill be people that want to bring about a change to an ongoing problem. All of which you still fail to recognise.

Sorry you now claim the discrimination is hearsay?
Move along I am not going to waste my time with such idiocy.

I know what some of them think because of what they say.

I don't really care if nobody cares what I think. You have no more importance than me here, so perhaps nobody cares what you think either. It's a forum, it's not a law-making organisation.

I'll move along when I feel like it. You don't get to decide what I say and when or where I say it.

The debate has reached a point of no return when you make a ridiculous unfounded claim to say the discrimination is hearsay. Do as you please but that kind of comment is abusrd and hence why there is no point wasting any further time with you on this.

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I know what some of them think because of what they say.

I don't really care if nobody cares what I think. You have no more importance than me here, so perhaps nobody cares what you think either. It's a forum, it's not a law-making organisation.

I'll move along when I feel like it. You don't get to decide what I say and when or where I say it.

The debate has reached a point of no return when you make a ridiculous unfounded claim to say the discrimination is hearsay. Do as you please but that kind of comment is abusrd and hence why there is no point wasting any further time with you on this.

So stop bothering me then. You seem to think you can control what I say, but you can't.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ask yourself if many of these black people care if a white person is killed, or if a police officer is killed - especially a white one. A lot of them do not - they only care if black people are killed. I don't think you even care much when white people are killed tbh.

It's all wrong - they should say that all lives matter, and concentrate on the issue of trigger-happy police officers. Then again, I think some police officers are trigger-happy because they feel under threat from gun-toting criminals - of any colour.

Trigger-happy police are killing black people at a disproportionate rate -- AND not being brought to justice. This problem is about racism.

Do you show the same level of concern with Syrian victims of ISIS violence as you do to, say, Lee Rigby? You're right in that all lives matter, but it's only natural to be more concerned about murders in your own community.

I've told you before - maybe black people run away more, or maybe they resist arrest more. Give me some facts, not just your opinion.

I'm not going around on the streets with banners saying "white lives matter", or "soldiers' lives matter". If you're going to make a public display of something, you're going to get comments which might be negative ones. Fox News is entitled to their opinion - you don't have to watch it if you don't like it.

I get to comment on it, though -- just like you said. In my opinion, which I'm equally entitled to, Fox News is irresponsibly deceiving its massive audience, to the detriment of American society.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Black Lives Matter protests:











What Fox News is doing here is flat wrong.

Did you see these pictures, Rags?

Does this look a hate group/murder movement to you?

Does anyone actually give a shit about the police officer who was shot, or his family? None of you do - because he's a cop and he's white.

Let's look at what David Clarke said. He's black by the way, in case none of you noticed.

He said that Obama has breathed life into this ugly movement. I think he means the cop-hating "black lives matter" group. He said Americans need to counter this slime, this filth coming out of these cop haters. He said it's an attempt to weaken the institution of policing, and that what needs to be straightened out is the subculture that has arisen out of the underclass in the American ghetto. He said fix the ghetto and then you'll see less need for assertive policing, and then you'll see less confrontation.

He said the police are beleaguered, and that they don't have any support from the political class. They don't have the resources or enough officers, and officers are sent into impossible environments and are expected to perform miracles. The problem is that Obama won't admit that the failed liberal urban policies have destroyed these great cities.

He said some more stuff, but that will do for now.

Comments?

Raggamuffin wrote:I'm not going around on the streets with banners saying "white lives matter", or "soldiers' lives matter". If you're going to make a public display of something, you're going to get comments which might be negative ones. Fox News is entitled to their opinion - you don't have to watch it if you don't like it.

But importance matters...and differs from situation to situation.  Cops are NOT going around killing whites.  First comes the fact; then comes the protest.

The soldiers example is interesting.  During the Iraq War, we did protest the killing of the young men and women.  But the answer was, get them out of there!  We should have the same resolve to stop the killing in this case...get them out of there.  Stop pulling guns and violence on black men.

Raggamuffin wrote:Does anyone actually give a shit about the police officer who was shot, or his family? None of you do - because he's a cop and he's white.
Emotive deflection, then falsely claiming people do not care when they do as he lost his life to blind hate

Let's look at what David Clarke said. He's black by the way, in case none of you noticed.

He said that Obama has breathed life into this ugly movement. I think he means the cop-hating "black lives matter" group. He said Americans need to counter this slime, this filth coming out of these cop haters. He said it's an attempt to weaken the institution of policing, and that what needs to be straightened out is the subculture that has arisen out of the underclass in the American ghetto. He said fix the ghetto and then you'll see less need for assertive policing, and then you'll see less confrontation.
Wow he sounds lovely for a middle Class Black and raised also as seen to despise black people himself by his poor choice of words and where did you see this Rags?
Fox news. He fails to recognize the discrimination within the Police forces and just because he is also black does not mean he is right and where clearly adds to the problem

He said the police are beleaguered, and that they don't have any support from the political class. They don't have the resources or enough officers, and officers are sent into impossible environments and are expected to perform miracles. The problem is that Obama won't admit that the failed liberal urban policies have destroyed these great cities.
All of which is still ignoring all the problems and trying to deflect the problems. Sure the Police are very important but it is also about changing poor perceptions by some within the Police force where there is clearly racism and discriminating. So you use a black man raised in white middle class mentality who fails to grasp the problem and wish to push it to one side

He said some more stuff, but that will do for now.

Comments?

Yes just another one trying to push the problem under the carpet
This clown has of course come outwith some of the most stupidest comments before




In a recent (you guessed it) Fox News interview, Milwaukee County Sheriff, David Clarke, talking about issues of police brutality and murder, declared that poor policing wasn't the problem, but absentee black fathers. Few lines are more popular with the conservative white media than this one. It not only fully absolves them from any responsibility, but places the full and complete blame for a very complex issue on the backs of a group Fox News doesn't really love that much anyway. Here's David Clarke:
“The discussion we need to be having and the NAACP can lead it — stay off the police — is why is the stuff happening, and what are we going to do about it,” he continued. “The number one cause of this is father-absent homes. So what are we going to do in terms of having more effective parenting, more role modeling, more engaged fathers in the lives of these young black men so that we don’t have this behavior.”
I honestly have to take a few deep breaths and have a "woosah" moment before I can even respond to such simplistic foolishness. First off, let me say that all parents should be great parents—regardless of race. Great parents, I will agree, play an amazing role in the lives of their children. This much is obvious. However, for Sheriff Clarke to reduce the issue of police brutality to one that would all but disappear if black fathers stepped their game up is completely ridiculous.
When Harvard Professor Dr. Henry Louis Gates was arrested on the doorstep of his home, was that because his father wasn't handling his business? When NY Times columnist Charles Blow revealed that police unjustly pulled a gun on his son, a biology student at Yale, because they thought he fit the bill of a suspect, was that because Charles wasn't really handling daddy duty properly? When Amadou Diallo was killed at his doorstep by the NYPD because they thought his wallet was a gun, was that because he didn't play enough baseball with his father?

Get real. In prominent case after case in the murder of black men, absentee dads have NOTHING to do with it.

Ron Davis, father of the slain Florida teenager Jordan Davis, was an amazing dad. Tracy Martin, father of another slain Florida teenager, Trayvon Martin, was as close with his son as a father could be. Mike Brown, Sr., father of slain Missouri teenager Mike Brown, was not an absentee father. In fact, weeks before his death, Mike Jr. served as best man in the wedding of Mike Sr.

Was Tamir Rice really shot and killed by Officer Timothy Loehmann because Tamir's father wasn't active in his life, or because Loehmann was so inept an officer that he was fired by his previous force for poor gun training, emotional instability, dishonesty, and more?

Aiyanna Jones, VonDerrit Myers, Ramarley Graham, and Kendrick Johnson - young black victims, all had very active fathers in their lives.

Not only that, but a recent study by the National Center for Health Statistics actually determined, contrary to the stereotype, that Black fathers are more likely to be active in their kids lives than dads from all other ethnic groups.

Here's the thing—having an amazing father is great, but it's not bulletproof to police harassment, brutality, or murder. It won't keep overzealous citizens with guns like George Zimmerman or Michael Dunn from killing black boys they don't like or trust. None of this is to say that we shouldn't always advocate for great parenting, but the reason London and all of the United Kingdom has less than one half of one percent of the police murders of the United States is not because fathers there are exponentially more active, to the factor of 10, in the lives of their kids. The parenting problems of Americans are not uniquely American, but the policing problems are—and the answers and solutions are a hell of a lot more complex than boosting the quality of black dads.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2015/01/28/1360719/-The-ridiculousness-of-Milwaukee-Sheriff-David-Clarke-blaming-black-fathers-for-police-brutality#

Raggamuffin wrote:Does anyone actually give a shit about the police officer who was shot, or his family? None of you do - because he's a cop and he's white.

Let's look at what David Clarke said. He's black by the way, in case none of you noticed.

He said that Obama has breathed life into this ugly movement. I think he means the cop-hating "black lives matter" group. He said Americans need to counter this slime, this filth coming out of these cop haters. He said it's an attempt to weaken the institution of policing, and that what needs to be straightened out is the subculture that has arisen out of the underclass in the American ghetto. He said fix the ghetto and then you'll see less need for assertive policing, and then you'll see less confrontation.

He said the police are beleaguered, and that they don't have any support from the political class. They don't have the resources or enough officers, and officers are sent into impossible environments and are expected to perform miracles. The problem is that Obama won't admit that the failed liberal urban policies have destroyed these great cities.

He said some more stuff, but that will do for now.

Comments?

Clarke is just another apologist for the general murder going on. Anytime one of these guys stands up and tries to lament any death, by justification of another guy's murder...you know something is wrong.

Here is a whole movement saying that we should stop murder. And here's a guy saying somehow those who want to stop the murder have killed another one.

What is his answer: KEEP THE MURDER GOING?? There's a flaw in that argument.

As soon as someone puts Zimmerman in the same category as Dunn, they lose the argument.

Raggamuffin wrote:As soon as someone puts Zimmerman in the same category as Dunn, they lose the argument.

Do they?
Nobody made you judge and jury

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:As soon as someone puts Zimmerman in the same category as Dunn, they lose the argument.

Do they?
Nobody made you judge and jury

I did, and I say that the argument is lost.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:

Do they?
Nobody made you judge and jury

I did, and I say that the argument is lost.

Which counts for zero.

http://www.newsfixboard.com/t11283-zimmerman-brags-about-killing-trayvon-martin-we-all-know-how-it-ended-for-the-last-moron-that-hit-me?highlight=zimmerman


Enough said as to the true nature of Zimmerman.
He even has a Confederate flag as his symbol.
Wow

Cuchulain wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I did, and I say that the argument is lost.

Which counts for zero.

In your opinion.

Now I can't be bothered with your nonsense in this thread, so go ahead and reply and boast about "beating" me if you like - just like Quill does. I really don't care.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Cuchulain wrote:


Which counts for zero.

In your opinion.

Now I can't be bothered with your nonsense in this thread, so go ahead and reply and boast about "beating" me if you like - just like Quill does. I really don't care.

Bye then.

She's following a strategy of running away, rather that confronting it. Go ahead and answer her didge, the rest of us are listening.

Original Quill wrote:She's following a strategy of running away, rather that confronting it.  Go ahead and answer her didge, the rest of us are listening.

I am waiting for her to respond to my original points.
She just decided to be judge on a single comparison and avoided the rest.
So I guess she wants to bow out, so no problem.

Anyway have to go Quill all the best

Raggamuffin wrote:Does anyone actually give a shit about the police officer who was shot, or his family? None of you do - because he's a cop and he's white.

Of course I care about that police officer, nobody should die like that. I would have wished him a long, happy life. I just want the police to do the right thing and only to use deadly force when there's no other choice.

Let's look at what David Clarke said. He's black by the way, in case none of you noticed.

So is Ben Carson, and I disagree with him too. Just because I believe in civil rights and the safety of the American public regardless of race doesn't mean I automatically agree with everything a black person says.

He said that Obama has breathed life into this ugly movement. I think he means the cop-hating "black lives matter" group. He said Americans need to counter this slime, this filth coming out of these cop haters. He said it's an attempt to weaken the institution of policing, and that what needs to be straightened out is the subculture that has arisen out of the underclass in the American ghetto. He said fix the ghetto and then you'll see less need for assertive policing, and then you'll see less confrontation.

And for some reason, you take him at face value, but not the vast majority of Black Lives Matter supporters who are peaceful and are simply calling for positive reforms that would make the country better. The police are only infallible in a police state, and Americans don't want that.

The problems of the inner cities could be solved if we could somehow figure out how to allow all Americans to lead at least a simple life of dignity.

He said the police are beleaguered, and that they don't have any support from the political class. They don't have the resources or enough officers, and officers are sent into impossible environments and are expected to perform miracles. The problem is that Obama won't admit that the failed liberal urban policies have destroyed these great cities.

He said some more stuff, but that will do for now.

Do you want to know why the police are underpaid and overworked? The American right wing. Politicians who decide we're going to be tough on crime and slash taxes on the wealthy at the same time. There isn't enough money for police officers, for teachers, for food inspectors or for any crucial job that is funded by the government when you have politicians who run on the Taxpayer Protection Pledge and refuse to find new revenue streams for public institutions.

As for Obama -- name one thing he's ever said that would incite someone to murder a police officer. Don't take Clarke's word for it on such a ridiculously incendiary accusation.

"Cop-hater"

I sit, smack bang in the middle of these debates.
In a nutshell here's my point:

Black people do get treated badly in USA - as we've seen and read here and elsewhere.
I am totally against this and that's that.

But!

In regards to rags' point about this title "black lives matter" implying that no others do....what if a white group were to call themselves that?
Would anyone subject?

If not, then all is fine.

If there were objections (which I feel there would be) them rags' point is a good one.

My main point though, is enough ie enough; cops can't go round killing black people because they bloody feel like it!

eddie wrote:I sit, smack bang in the middle of these debates.
In a nutshell here's my point:

Black people do get treated badly in USA - as we've seen and read here and elsewhere.
I am totally against this and that's that.

But!

In regards to rags' point about this title "black lives matter" implying that no others do....what if a white group were to call themselves that?
Would anyone subject?

If not, then all is fine.

If there were objections (which I feel there would be) them rags' point is a good one.

My main point though, is enough ie enough; cops can't go round killing black people because they bloody feel like it!

The police and the justice system haven't been treating white people as though their lives don't matter -- at least not to the severity that it's been happening to the black community. Someday white people will be a minority in the U.S., if current trends hold up. If, at that point, predominantly black, Latino or Asian police officers are killing white men with impunity, a White Lives Matter movement would be appropriate.

I really doubt that many people involved in BLM thinks that white lives don't matter. They're trying to put a spotlight on a specific program and ask people to think about the fact that those people who were killed cherished their lives just as much as anyone else, so that there will be more urgency to reform efforts.

I think the point is, Black Lives have never mattered as much, what they are essentially saying is Black Lives Matter As Well.

Yep, fair enough I suppose to both above posts.

I've no real problem with title this per se but feel, if a white group somewhere, called themeleves something collectively by their colour, would people perceive that in the wrong way!
Sorry not sure I made sense there but I'm tired lol

eddie wrote:Yep, fair enough I suppose to both above posts.

I've no real problem with title this per se but feel,  if a white group somewhere, called themeleves something collectively by their colour, would people perceive that in the wrong way!
Sorry not sure I made sense there but I'm tired lol

Kid: "It's Mother's Day? Why isn't there a Kid's Day?"

Mother: "Because everyday is Kid's Day."

There really aren't many organizations in the U.S. that don't advance white people's interests. The country is still very much set up for white people. Why isn't there a White History Month? Because every month is White History Month.

I think in the U.S., groups oriented toward white people are, in the main, seen as racist -- then again, they often are racist. The major exception would be the many organizations that provide relief to the Appalachian region, the population of which is overwhelmingly white and exceedingly poor.

We generally don't find it appropriate to create organizations for the advancement of people who haven't been systematically discriminated against because of traits they were born with; it seems kind of cry-baby-ish Of course, they still exist!

eddie wrote:....what if a white group were to call themselves that?

Point taken.  It would immediately be objected to, because of the implied, but unspoken premise that whites need protection like blacks.  But whites are privileged, and coddled by the police.  Blacks are not.  

There is in fact no statistical equivalency between blacks and whites in the treatment by the police, or the entire criminal justice system.  So, why bring it up? Why even contrast whites with blacks?  Its a specious issue...one I suspect that Raggs raised only for argument sake. It has no basis in reality.

eddie wrote:I sit, smack bang in the middle of these debates.
In a nutshell here's my point:

Black people do get treated badly in USA - as we've seen and read here and elsewhere.
I am totally against this and that's that.

But!

In regards to rags' point about this title "black lives matter" implying that no others do....what if a white group were to call themselves that?
Would anyone subject?

If not, then all is fine.

If there were objections (which I feel there would be) them rags' point is a good one.

My main point though, is enough ie enough; cops can't go round killing black people because they bloody feel like it!

Apparently, the number of police officers killed by black people is also disproportionate.

White people are also killed by the police. The problem is violence in general, the fact that pretty much anyone can carry a gun, so the police have to carry them as well, and the fact that liberals keep telling black people that they're victims, even if they never had anything bad happen to them.

Original Quill wrote:

eddie wrote:....what if a white group were to call themselves that?

Point taken.  It would immediately be objected to, because of the implied, but unspoken premise that whites need protection like blacks.  But whites are privileged, and coddled by the police.  Blacks are not.  

There is in fact no statistical equivalency between blacks and whites in the treatment by the police, or the entire criminal justice system.  So, why bring it up?  Why even contrast whites with blacks?  Its a specious issue...one I suspect that Raggs raised only for argument sake.  It has no basis in reality.

You're the one who constantly contrasts white people and black people.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

eddie wrote:Yep, fair enough I suppose to both above posts.

I've no real problem with title this per se but feel,  if a white group somewhere, called themeleves something collectively by their colour, would people perceive that in the wrong way!
Sorry not sure I made sense there but I'm tired lol

Kid: "It's Mother's Day? Why isn't there a Kid's Day?"

Mother: "Because everyday is Kid's Day."

There really aren't many organizations in the U.S. that don't advance white people's interests. The country is still very much set up for white people. Why isn't there a White History Month? Because every month is White History Month.

I think in the U.S., groups oriented toward white people are, in the main, seen as racist -- then again, they often are racist. The major exception would be the many organizations that provide relief to the Appalachian region, the population of which is overwhelmingly white and exceedingly poor.

We generally don't find it appropriate to create organizations for the advancement of people who haven't been systematically discriminated against because of traits they were born with; it seems kind of cry-baby-ish Of course, they still exist!

Perhaps if the whole lot of you stopped bleating on about history the whole time, things might improve.

Anyway, hasn't this business about it being a hate group come about because of the pigs in a blanket, fry them like bacon thing?

That has been widely touted as "lighthearted", but they should be careful because the cops might not see it that way, and some cop haters might take it as a green light to kill cops.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Kid: "It's Mother's Day? Why isn't there a Kid's Day?"

Mother: "Because everyday is Kid's Day."

There really aren't many organizations in the U.S. that don't advance white people's interests. The country is still very much set up for white people. Why isn't there a White History Month? Because every month is White History Month.

I think in the U.S., groups oriented toward white people are, in the main, seen as racist -- then again, they often are racist. The major exception would be the many organizations that provide relief to the Appalachian region, the population of which is overwhelmingly white and exceedingly poor.

We generally don't find it appropriate to create organizations for the advancement of people who haven't been systematically discriminated against because of traits they were born with; it seems kind of cry-baby-ish Of course, they still exist!

Perhaps if the whole lot of you stopped bleating on about history the whole time, things might improve.

I respect the Ben's views far more than yours here. Where your limited knowledge of the US is based on nothing more than forums. Where he actually lives and experinces seeing this discrmination. At least I have been to the US a few times also, so its fair to say you have a very limited and also prejudiced view of the situation. The fact is there clearly is an issue still in the US which you have failed to grasp.